Political Crossfire Forums

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

straw man wrote: So if a boxer gets knocked out during a fight, then he ceases to be a human being while he lies unconscious? nope, there is still cognisant brain function while we are unconscious.

Quote: What would you call him then? Or if someone falls into a coma, then suddenly they are not human life? rather, if they are in a persistent vegetative stage, then they no longer are a human being. They become "property" of their relatives who get to decide what happens to them. That was the issue in the Terri Schiavo case.

Quote: I guess that must be why the killers who pulled the plug on Schiavo didn't have any qualms about it. Oh, what was your solution, then?

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

straw man wrote: LostSoul32 wrote: The issue is whether or not an embryo is a human, not whether or not the cells are alive. And an embryo is a human. it is human. You have yet to show that it is "a" human.

Quote: See my thread about human beings for proof on that one. There was no proof, only your opinion.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

straw man wrote: Even if they do have brain activity, a comatose person or a knocked out boxer are no more capable of "thinking" or "thought" then an embryo at any stage. Utterly and completely false, as the embryo doesn't even have the mechanical structures necessary for thought. Your claim is false.

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

steen wrote: straw man wrote: Even if they do have brain activity, a comatose person or a knocked out boxer are no more capable of "thinking" or "thought" then an embryo at any stage. Utterly and completely false, as the embryo doesn't even have the mechanical structures necessary for thought. Your claim is false.

So you are saying that knocked out people or comatose people ARE capable of thinking?

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

Brain activity comes with AGE. Labeling a newly conceived human life subhuman is nothing less than age discrimination and murder to preserve your sexual freedom.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8946

straw man wrote: So you are saying that knocked out people or comatose people ARE capable of thinking?

Yes, what they lack is the means to express such thoughts.

Izzibeth · Joined: 12 May 2006 Posts: 423

AllAmericanMan wrote: Brain activity comes with AGE. Labeling a newly conceived human life subhuman is nothing less than age discrimination and murder to preserve your sexual freedom.

"age discrimination and murder to preserve your sexual freedom?"

sexual freedom would be there with or without the abortion. there are people out there who have been on birth control and used other modes of protection and by luck/statistics/chance.. have gotten pregnant. even people who are married, only have one sexual partner, are devoted to that partner... sometimes, they cannot afford to bring a child into the world. it is not just "crack w***s" and "stupid teenagers" who get pregnant and do not want to have the baby. sometimes it is not even just a matter of not being able to afford it. sometimes... the person does not want to have a baby. plain and simple.

if people have the right to have sex with whomever they choose, whenever they choose.. then they also have the 'right' to deal with any potential consequences as they arise. people with HIV or AIDS are not prohibited by law from having sex with people as they choose. they and their partner (knowing or unknowing of the persons condition) take that risk every time they engage in intercourse. they make a decision. they live with the consequences. unfortunately, there is no choice on your part after you have contracted AIDs. but it is a consequence nonetheless.. just like an 'unplanned' or 'unwanted' pregnancy.

at this point.. the pregnancy can be terminated. it is your choice. you then deal with the consequences of the decision you have made. you live forever with the knowledge that you denied yourself of a child or you live forever with the knowledge that you went through with the pregnancy. you still have a choice and that is what the debate should ultimately be about. do you have a choice? the simple answer is yes. just because people might think it is wrong does not mean that the choice isn't there.

i have known people from all different angles of this argument. one of my best friends, very careful with her boyfriend at the time... did not use protection ONCE. she got pregnant. he "couldn't handle it" and left her. she was 18.. in college.. had been with him for about 6 months.. he left. she made a very, very hard decision and decided to terminate the pregnancy. she dealt with the pain of the actual forced miscarriage and then dealt with what she had done. and she will forever have that knowledge. when she gets older and decides to have kids (which i know she will) she will constantly be reminded by those children that she CHOOSES to have... that she once chose not to have one. it hurts her to this day. but it was a choice and she made it. it effected only her in the end.

my old landlord was a young woman.. in her thirties. she used abortion almost as a form of birth control. she had 3 or 4 of them. she was not safe and just decided to get abortions whenever it was most convenient. then, luckily for her, when she decided to have a child, she did. and her little girl turned out fine (many who choose abortion as birth control are not so lucky since the human body will only take so much abuse). but she just had them whenever. do i agree with that? not personally. although i agree that having an abortion is a choice... i do not think it should be used as a regular form of birth control. that shows irresponsibility. most likely it is better for that potential child that it is NOT brought into this life by you if you are so casually discarding it. but, it was her choice. she made it. she was one of the lucky ones who was able to have children afterwards but... let's say she wasn't able to. it would have been a consequence of the choices she had made in the past. and it would have effected only her in the end.

my old roommate got pregnant from a friend. i was the only other person besides her who knew for about 3 months before she figured out what she wanted to do. she wasn't 16 or 18 or 22... she was 25 and not a child anymore. we talked a lot and i told her about my friend who had had the abortion and if that was the route she chose.. she could probably talk to her about it for support. but my roommate ended up talking to our landlord (one of her friends).. and she was so appalled by the casual way that our landlord spoke about her multiple abortions. in the past whenever we talked about it she always used to say "God doesn't want me to have a baby... because with what i have done and how careless i have been.. if he wanted me to.. he would give me one." i ... don't really have that same view, but i think that belief coupled with the anger she felt towards our landlord and how she thought of abortions helped her make the decision that she wanted to keep her child. the father refused (and still does) the child despite having a paternity test.. and she said "that is his decision." which it is. she does not even ask him for money. she has a BEAUTIFUL son and she loves him more than anything. which is great. he was her decision. and his life has effected everyone but her the most. she is living with the consequences of her actions. it's great that they ended up being positive.

the choice to be sexually promiscuous is there. there are some things you cannot choose (such as getting rid of HIV once you have contracted it) but there are some things you can. when you get pregnant... you can still choose to not have the child.

last example of this.. our downstairs neighbor... her husband was a ship captain and went out to sea. she cheated on him while he was out there and got pregnant. now.. there was no hiding this one. she already had grown son and if her husband had come back and found out she was pregnant .. the time line just wouldn't have worked out and he would have known it wasn't his. she was sooooo stressed out... that she drank, smoked pot... worried, worried, worried. one day she had a miscarriage in her home. she aborted her own child through her actions. was it intentional? knowing her... i don't think so. it was probably a small hope that came true. she MADE it come true by abusing her body in such a way and stressing herself out. she and her husband ended up getting divorced anyway but... her choice to cheat on her husband got her pregnant... her choice to drink, stress out, worry, and do drugs made her abort her child. there was no sense of relief when it happened either. it was just another consequence and another thing to worry and stress out about. but it was her decision. she made it. she lives with it.

when i read back on these i'm actually kind of surprised but, believe it or not, these are all real people and they are all real stories. i know all of these people and will continue to know them. their sexual freedom was never at risk. they made their own choices. (true that my old roommate who had the baby hasn't had too much sex since then... but.. again, that would be a choice. she 'learned a lesson'. i suppose). the choice should remain... because even if you make it ILLEGAL to have an abortion... people are going to do it. because, even without your consent.. they still have CHOICE in the matter. they have a choice all the way up until that baby is born to 'abort' it. after that... they still have a choice to murder that new person. that is now crossing the line into just flat out murder which is measurable and punishable by our laws.

here is a question.....

what do you think the acceptable punishment would be (should abortion be made illegal) for the mother who has the abortion? i'm just curious. ......after my long post that went way off topic....

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

Quote: sexual freedom would be there with or without the abortion Abortion enables people to have a more care free sex life by giving them an "easy" way out (not to suggest its an easy decision) from the choice they made of having sex. If you cant deal with giving a child up for adoption or raising that child yourself you should consider such things BEFORE engaging in the activity.

Quote: if people have the right to have sex with whomever they choose, whenever they choose.. then they also have the 'right' to deal with any potential consequences as they arise I do not believe terminating the life of another individual is a viable option to dealing with the consequences of anybodys actions.

Quote: you live forever with the knowledge that you denied yourself of a child or you live forever with the knowledge that you went through with the pregnancy I dont care about the mother. She chose to have sex and that is her right. Now I believe its the babys right inside her to continue to live and grow. The babies right to life supercedes the mothers "right" to avoid the consequences of her own actions in order to live the easy life.

Quote: just because people might think it is wrong does not mean that the choice isn't there.
The choice to murder a born human is there too.

Quote: that she once chose not to have one. it hurts her to this day. but it was a choice and she made it. it effected only her in the end.
Wrong. It severely effected the unique human individual growing inside her by robbing him or her of their entire existence. Such an effect that can not even be compared to any type of emotional trama the mother suffered when killing her own child.

Quote: choice to be sexually promiscuous is there. there are some things you cannot choose (such as getting rid of HIV once you have contracted it) but there are some things you can. when you get pregnant... you can still choose to not have the child.

yes you can still choose to murder your child. Unfortunately there is no choice for the child the mother knowingly took the chance of creating.

To sum up my response to your entire thread the mother is not the victim of abortions. The mother chose to have sex and must be forced to live with her decision. Everyone has the right to life no matter how young they are.

Izzibeth · Joined: 12 May 2006 Posts: 423

AllAmericanMan wrote:
To sum up my response to your entire thread the mother is not the victim of abortions. The mother chose to have sex and must be forced to live with her decision. Everyone has the right to life no matter how young they are.

no, the mother is not the "victim" but should she choose to have an abortion then she is the only one who has to live with that decision that she made. the potential child never forms into a sentient human being who has to deal with pain, happiness, sorrow, joy, etc. the mother already has. the potential child never need deal with the consequences.. it's role is cut short.

"the mother chose to have sex and must be forced to live with her decision." yet... she has more decisions ahead of her. whether you make it illegal or not (same with murder or any other illegal act) the woman still has the choice to do it or not. if a woman does not want to have a child.. SHE WILL NOT HAVE IT.. regardless of what YOU or anyone else thinks. she will abuse herself to the point of abortion... she will attempt to abort the child herself ... she will kill herself... the choice to live YOUR life without endangering it should remain (abortion) should you not want to have the child. short of strapping a women down in a hospital bed for 10 months, you can not force anyone to carry a child they don't want. and that... would be torture. stepping into new grounds that i won't go into. an unborn, unwanted child becomes nothing more than a disease. a parasite. (again.. please note "unwanted"... maybe i should caps it.. "UNWANTED child".) living, growing, feeding off of you. you don't want it there but you made a decision to have sex and got pregnant... so you should be forced to be in that state. because for some reason.. making sure that life comes into existence outweighs your own rights. in life.... there are some circumstances in which one life comes before another. there is no code by which it is written. it just happens. a mother would rather (in most cases) you save her child than her... even in the animal kingdom.. a mother will DIE fighting for the life of her child. a child will also die fighting for the life of it's mother but guaranteed the mother will do what she can to make sure that if a sacrifice has to be made... it will be her.

in this case.. the unborn, undeveloped cells inside of a woman should, ideally, come second to even just the wants of the mother. she already has the right because ALL can agree that she is a human. she has human rights. forcing her to carry a child is infringing upon more than one of those human rights. why is that okay? because you are preserving the rights of the potential human being inside of her? because discarding one human's rights for the potential rights of another potential human is how this matter should be handled?

i don't think so. i think despite everyone's ideas about what makes a human and what doesn't... a woman who does not want a child will do all she can to ensure that she does not have it. there are some who, given time, change their minds and want the baby (there goes choice again!).. they are allowed to change their minds. by making abortion illegal you are doing nothing more than endangering the lives of many, many women who will find a way to do it. you can not win in this case. you can make it illegal but that just makes people find other means.

and again..... i'm curious as to what an acceptable punishment for mothers who have an abortion would be...

Izzibeth · Joined: 12 May 2006 Posts: 423

sorry about my spelling going crazygonuts in certain sections there. would edit but the computer gets angry when i try so i gave up. *^_^* ~~<3

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Izzibeth wrote: no, the mother is not the "victim" but should she choose to have an abortion then she is the only one who has to live with that decision that she made.

What about the father?

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Izzibeth wrote: a woman who does not want a child will do all she can to ensure that she does not have it... you can make it illegal but that just makes people find other means.

That's a darn good argument. I don't know what can be said about that one. Coat hanger sales will go through the roof!

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

the response is that the mother will risk her life to simply get rid of a baby when she can put it up for adoption.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

Chart

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 8946

Plodder wrote: Chart

The reason numbers are so low, is because abortion is a legal option in the United States, which has decreased the number of total illegal abortions by such a staggering amount that they are minimized hence lowering the number of deaths from such minimized actions.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

straw man wrote: steen wrote: straw man wrote: Even if they do have brain activity, a comatose person or a knocked out boxer are no more capable of "thinking" or "thought" then an embryo at any stage. Utterly and completely false, as the embryo doesn't even have the mechanical structures necessary for thought. Your claim is false. So you are saying that knocked out people or comatose people ARE capable of thinking? They still process stimuli, but they have no cognizant awareness of these.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

AllAmericanMan wrote: Brain activity comes with AGE. Well, yes it begins sometime after the 26th week of pregnancy.

Quote: Labeling a newly conceived human life subhuman is nothing less than age discrimination But then, I have not seen anybody here use that label, so that is a rather irrelevant remark.

Quote: and murder to preserve your sexual freedom. Yuor claim is utterly false.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

AllAmericanMan wrote: Quote: sexual freedom would be there with or without the abortion Abortion enables people to have a more care free sex life by giving them an "easy" way out (not to suggest its an easy decision) from the choice they made of having sex. And lung cancer surgery enables people to have a more care free smoking life by giving them an "easy" way out. So what? It is almost as if you want to punish them and make them suffer for being pregnant against YOUR will, eh? fascism rears its ugly head again. Alive and well in the pro-life movement.

Quote: If you cant deal with giving a child up for adoption or raising that child yourself you should consider such things BEFORE engaging in the activity. Why? It is none of your business why other people have sex, never mind how much you want to use the theocratic state to control people's actions. Inquisition all over again. Some of us will rather die than be oppressed by the theocratic fascism you are pushing. If you want a culture war, rest assured that you will.

Quote: Quote: if people have the right to have sex with whomever they choose, whenever they choose.. then they also have the 'right' to deal with any potential consequences as they arise I do not believe terminating the life of another individual is a viable option to dealing with the consequences of anybodys actions. But then, it is fortunate that this does not occur during an abortion anyway.

Quote: Quote: you live forever with the knowledge that you denied yourself of a child or you live forever with the knowledge that you went through with the pregnancy I dont care about the mother. obviously.

Quote: She chose to have sex and that is her right. Now I believe its the babys right inside her to continue to live and grow. (1) there is no baby. (2) Your belief doesn't match reality. there is no such right, regardless of how much you want there to be.

Quote: The babies right to life supercedes the mothers "right" to avoid the consequences of her own actions in order to live the easy life. (1) there is no baby. (2) Nope, this is not so.

Quote: Quote: just because people might think it is wrong does not mean that the choice isn't there. The choice to murder a born human is there too. Rather irrelevant. Abortion is not murder.

Quote: Quote: that she once chose not to have one. it hurts her to this day. but it was a choice and she made it. it effected only her in the end.
Wrong. It severely effected the unique human individual growing inside her This fantasy creature of your wild and overheated imagination did not exist.

Quote: by robbing him or her of their entire existence. No different than if they never had sex. potential is not actual.

Quote: Such an effect that can not even be compared to any type of emotional trama the mother suffered when killing her own child. (1) There is no child. (2) There is no evidence of a trauma from removing non-sentient, non-sensate tissue any more than if a tumor was removed.

Quote: Quote: choice to be sexually promiscuous is there. there are some things you cannot choose (such as getting rid of HIV once you have contracted it) but there are some things you can. when you get pregnant... you can still choose to not have the child. yes you can still choose to murder your child. Irrelevant, as abortion is not murder and does not involve a child, your emotional histrionics none withstanding.

Quote: Unfortunately there is no choice for the child the mother knowingly took the chance of creating. No child ever existed, your false claim none withstanding.

Quote: To sum up my response to your entire thread the mother is not the victim of abortions. The mother chose to have sex and must be forced to live with her decision. "must be forced"!!!! Yes, that sums up the pro-life movement right there. Pure misogyny. Oppression and control of women through enslavement. Disgusting. No wonder your types seem so utterly despicable and disgusting.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

Plodder wrote: the response is that the mother will risk her life to simply get rid of a baby when she can put it up for adoption. Adoption is a parenting decision, not a pregnancy decision.

sgtshortness · Joined: 17 Mar 2006 Posts: 82

Quote: Labeling a newly conceived human life subhuman is nothing less than age discrimination

Time to let four-month-old babies vote because not letting them vote is age discrimination, then.